I didn't use to play multiplayer in RTS (Sorry for multitopic)

Before I play a multiplayer real-time strategy game, I played singleplayer campaigns and enjoyed the story of every faction in the game. But ironically, I found out that most rts games tend for multiplayer, where every player chooses their in-game faction and uses it to battle against each other with different or even the same faction. Can't imagine if the player plays a good faction while their teammate plays as an evil faction. Or a player plays as a good faction while their opponent plays as a good faction as well.

In fact, in every singleplayer skirmish game, I tend to get a capture unit to get an opponent's builder or production building of a different faction, so I can use them to taste the opponent's own medicine or sometimes use them as a puppet with my faction units, especially in a casual skirmish. This is another reason why I love Zero-K. Zero-K uses a starting factory as a player's main faction and lets them switch whenever they want. The game doesn't want a player to have the only type of factory.

And for campaigns, the game developers care less about them than a multiplayer mode. If only there are games that care MORE on singleplayer (or at least co-op) campaign because I have a dream to make a real-time strategy game with more and longer campaigns and more factions.

I talk about developers in general, not specifically Zero-K developers

I haven't played in a long time (though I sometimes come back to read this forum) and let me just say that this RTS is much different from other RTS games I have played. Everything has been designed with teamplay in account: economy grids, economy sharing and overflow, unit variety, large unit construction, air support, all benefit from team cohesion and communication. This is also the only game I've seen with such a large variety of strategy, which means all players even in large team games always have something to do or something to deal with. All units are different in so many ways that the 'riot/skirm/raider/assault' description feels simplistic as there is so much more to each individual unit, but it does the job. There is always more to learn. I will start playing this again soon I think.

The AI, back when I played it, reinforced bad habits such as porcing in players on large maps and so the singleplayer experience was always quite different from a multiplayer one. If there is another campaign for this game it should be designed for co-op from the get-go, and should be designed so the player verges on 'good practice' multiplayer strategy, i.e. less porcing. The goal being good teamplay is taught so they are well suited and well seasoned for the lobpot

It's not that we don't care about the campaign. A lot of us really care for the project, and time/willpower are our constraints. There's tons to do and tons that needs doing along with putting out fires, social problems, etc and it really cuts into our resource pool.

quote: Forcing them into viable multiplayer strategies might even get them feeling that they have been cheated of their strategic freedom. It's not much different from how lobsterpot players feel when we try to push them into 1v1/small teams.

For what it's worth, this is a culture problem and could potentially be solved by shifting the culture towards accepting a more "do whatever besides teamkill" perception (aka true casual games). Such a culture could be potentially enforced through moderation and other means at a high social cost. The problem remains one of perception.

I think that different styles being viable on different modes is great. Some players love to proc. and single player/co-op does allow this to work, albeit less well in co-op. I've also seen players agree to a timed truce while they prepare for battle and then procing works too. Building games are popular and ZK does have that potential should players tailor their games to that style.

However, in real-time multiplayer games, procing takes extreme levels of skill to be viable and only against players of less skill. It's the same for most RTS games and in real life because mobility is so powerful both on defense and offense. It just costs less to have a powerful mobile army than to build heavy defenses across an entire border. The only exception being actual choke points and in the day of cheap air power choke points really do not exist.

Generally speaking, the reason some people prefer procing is because it requires less apm (actions per minute) and allows for slower reaction speed/less concentration/less stress. Turn-based games or hybrid games fill this niche better than an RTS ever will. ZK already has such a sophisticated UI and balanced unit variety that pure game knowledge can heavily negate pure apm/reaction speed play far better than any RTS I've ever seen.

Very well built RTS - best I've ever seen.

rifqifajarzain

Everyone who is willing to put work into zk is extremly welcome.

I just want to ask you if you have ever done a project of that size and have a rough estimate of the time needed to pull it through. This is NOT in any way meant to discourage you, but meant as a tip on how you should start with it. It would be sad if you ran out of motivation half-way through AFTER you have already dumped a lot of time into it. A good overview of the project is really helpful to prevent problems later.

Maybe you already know this for ages, in this case ignore me :D

quote: Can't imagine if the player plays a good faction while their teammate plays as an evil faction. Or a player plays as a good faction while their opponent plays as a good faction as well.

PERSONAL OPINION NOW: I feel that a "good vs evil"-scenario feels a bit outdated in terms of writing. Sure, you will find many examples for this dichotomy in currently written stories, but i think the SCII-way of presenting factions not as good or bad, but as having clashing goals and opinions is more reflected and interesting. Plus you avoid the scenarios you describe in the quote above. :)

I wish you all the good luck and success for your work that you can get! :)



Histidine

Cutscenes? Wow, that sounds very advanced.

If not good or evil faction, then protagonist and antagonist faction.
Like if we play as a GDI faction, the opponent plays as a GDI faction as well.
If I play as a CORE faction, the opponent would play CORE faction as well.